…would have bought a bed from IKEA long ago
regards, Venus
Day: October 9, 2021
A final rule prohibits swimming with, approaching, or remaining within 50 yards of spinner dolphins. A proposed rule may establish time-area closures of select nearshore resting areas.
Like all animals, Hawaiian spinner dolphins need rest. Spinner dolphins are nocturnal feeders that perform critical resting behaviors during the day while in safe, nearshore areas. But for decades, spinner dolphins in Hawaiʻi have experienced intense viewing pressure from commercial and recreational wildlife viewers seeking close encounters with the charismatic marine mammals.
The natural behavior patterns of the animals are massively disrupted, which most people are not even aware of.
But that is over now: The USA has decided that from October 28, 2021, people will not be allowed to approach the spinner dolphins that are resident there less than 50 meters near the coast.
This new regulation will now require the public to respect spinner dolphins’ space so they can shelter undisturbed in their resting habitat close to shore.
The US government is thereby legally implementing the ban on contact between the marine mammals and us.
No swimming with, approaching, or remaining within 50 yards of spinner dolphins
This has been confirmed by the National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA. The new law applies to swimmers, divers, boats, and also to drones that are within two nautical miles of the coast of Hawaii’s main islands and designated waters between the islands of Lāna‘i, Maui and Kahoʻolawe.
WAV Comment: The killing of hunt hounds is not new; it has happened for ages.
In the UK there was a thing known as the ‘cub hunting season’; where new hunt hounds were ‘tested’ out the innocent cubs of a fox pack to see if they had the ‘blood lust’ that was required of them.
Often, if they were found to be too docile and lack that killer instinct, then those hounds were ‘dispatched’ by the hunts – by that, we mean shot through the head and disposed of. It has been captured on video in the past.
Regards Mark
Latest:
Secret filming shows hounds being shot dead at hunt kennels
ITV is a major British television station.
Secret filming shows hounds being shot dead at hunt kennels | ITV News
An anti-hunting activist told ITV News Correspondent Rupert Evelyn the dogs are killed and “thrown away like garbage” when they are no longer “fit for purpose”
Secret cameras have recorded huntsmen shooting and killing hounds that had been used for hunting.
The pictures, filmed by anti-hunting groups the Hunt Investigation Team and Keep the Ban and shared exclusively with ITV News, is the first time footage of a hunt shooting its hounds has been shown publicly.
Hounds can be killed for several reasons including being too old to hunt, or if they get ill or injured. The practice is not illegal.
The pictures were taken at the kennels of the Duke of Beaufort’s Hunt in Badminton, Gloucestershire. The Duke of Beaufort’s Hunt told ITV News that its hounds are “humanely euthanised” if they cannot be rehomed. It added that the majority of hounds are “unsuitable for rehoming” because “they are not house-trained and have only ever been used to living in a pack environment”.
The secret footage, recorded over several periods between April and September, shows four separate examples of hounds being shot:
- In two cases, a huntsman is seen putting a gun to the head of the hound and killing it.
- In another, the hound appears to be unwell and is carried onto the grass by the hunt staff before being shot.
- Another shows the hound being shot twice, three minutes apart.
Watch the secret footage at a hunt’s kennels where hounds were filmed being shot dead – click on the above link.
Rob Pownall, Keep The Ban founder, said: “It’s some pretty upsetting footage but this is commonplace for hunts across the country. This is not an acceptable way to end an animal’s life. These hounds suffered immense pain.”The activities shown in the video aren’t actually illegal, but there’s no moral defence for what’s shown.”
The footage comes ahead of a vote later this month by National Trust members to decide whether trail hunts on its land should be banned during the next hunting season.
The National Trust suspended all trail hunting licences last year, alongside a host of other large landowners including Forestry England, following a report by ITV News about the content of webinars hosted by the Hunting Office.
Conservative MP Tracey Crouch, who is co-chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Animal Welfare, said the footage of the hounds being shot dead is “absolutely heartbreaking” and “distressing”.
“I don’t understand why a dog…needs to be euthanised in this way and I am sure there are much more compassionate ways of putting a dog to sleep”, Ms Crouch told ITV News.
“We have many working dogs across this country in different sectors, such as, for example, the police or army, and I doubt very much that those kinds of dogs are put to sleep with a bolt to the head, so I don’t quite understand why it is appropriate for hunting hounds to be euthanised this way.”
After watching the secret filming, Mike Jessop, a fellow of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, said that from what he saw, he did not believe the huntsmen were professionally trained in putting animals down.”There was no evidence of [the huntsperson] being veterinary trained or veterinary surgeons. The lack of use of any veterinary equipment that one would expect such as stethoscopes to ascertain the dogs were dead was just lacking”, he said.”The evidence from the video doesn’t show any illegal activity. My concern is whether there is any suffering after the shot, because nobody is being careful enough in checking the dogs are truly dead.”In one of the videos, the [hound’s] tail was still waggling very vigorously for quite some time, even when the dog was being loaded in the wheelbarrow.
Continued on next page.
In Berlin, wolves are sighted for the first time inside the motorway ring. The debate about the wolf has reached the capital of Germany!!
The headlines from the German press:
“a wolf pack at the gates of Berlin”
“wolves only 30 kilometers from the city center”
“wolves within the Berlin ring” …
“the wolf in Berlin: when will the first child be torn, people ask”
Conservationists are happy, farmers are less enthusiastic. The hunting association is now reproaching the Federal Agency for Nature Conservation.
The most important question arises: do these strictly protected predators pose a threat?
How much wolf can Berlin take?
A wolf pack has settled west of Berlin in the nature reserve around Berlin.
About two weeks ago, two parents and four puppies ran in front of the lens of a photographer who was out and about in the 4,500 hectare nature reserve at the gates of Berlin and Potsdam for the “Heinz Sielmann Foundation”.
According to the foundation, the six animals have settled in a fenced area of around 1,800 hectares in the middle of the area – there they are largely undisturbed by humans.
The area is only around 30 kilometers from Alexanderplatz (in the center of Berlin). On Tuesday, the State Environment Agency (LfU) confirmed to the German Press Agency that the animals were wolves. Other wolf packs had not yet settled within the Berlin Ring.
It is very clear why the pack chose the protected area of all places: Here they will find everything they need. Space, water, enough food and above all: peace and quiet.
The area is actually too small for a pack, but the animals would have a lot of food there due to the high number of game.
Deer and wild boars were not enough for the animals: In August and September cracks were reported from goats and sheep grazing there.
The population is increasing, the animals go where they can find game. According to the hunting association, the game population has already been drastically reduced in this area.
“I wonder what happens when the wolf runs out of wild animals” so a hunter
“Not only do wolves deserve protection, grazing animals also deserve protection. The pastures should not be “set tables” for wolves. “ says Federal Agriculture Minister Julia Klöckner.
The Ministry of the Environment says: … “And if a wolf repeatedly ventures too close to human settlements, then it is classified as a problem wolf and can be shot.”
And I mean…“And if a wolf repeatedly ventures too close to human settlements, then it is classified as a problem wolf and can be shot.”
Apparently man is now an endangered species, badly decimated in its existence by the predators around him.
Worse still, the other species keep humans industrialized and slaughter them by the millions every day.
The useless copies are shredded by the millions….
Or how was that?
The normal ‘collateral damage’ in “beneficial” animal husbandry is 100 times greater than all wolves combined could ever cause for their survival.
By the year 2000 the wolf had been exterminated from humans in Germany.
Purely informative: The wolf is not settled but turns back by itself.
The wolf is (still) protected by European (Fauna-Flora-Habitat Directive FFH-RL, Appendix IV) law, and as an endangered animal species it has a high protection status in Germany (Section 44 of the Federal Nature Conservation Act BNatSchG).
Well… a few psychopaths with hunting license are of the opinion that they don’t have to comply with “nonsensical” laws – since 2000 there have been 64 deliberately and therefore illegally shot wolves in Germany.
The number of unreported cases is higher, because even entire packs just disappear from the scene.
No case has been resolved so far, let alone brought to court
Wolves do not practice mass animal husbandry, they either eat what is there or starve to death.
In contrast to us humans, who not only shoot animals for fun, although we do not need their flesh and skin for life at all, but enslave them, torture and brutally kill them in order to eat them.
May the family live long and in peace
My best regards to all, Venus
UK public now eating significantly less meat – BBC News
UK public now eating significantly less meat
Daily meat consumption in the UK has fallen by 17% in the last decade, a study has shown.
That reduction though is not happening quickly enough to meet a key national target, according to scientists.
The aim is to reduce the environmental impact of our diets.
This goal, set by the National Food Strategy, is based on a review of the whole UK food system – from farming and production to hunger and sustainability.
It recommends meat consumption in the UK fall by 30% over the next 10 years.
- Climate change food calculator: What’s your diet’s carbon footprint?
- Should there be a tax on red meat?
- Cows trained to use special ‘MooLoo’ toilet
“We now know we need a more substantial reduction,” said lead researcher Cristina Stewart from the University of Oxford.
The new study, published in the journal the Lancet Planetary Health, revealed that while most people are eating less red and processed meat compared to a decade ago, they are eating more white meat.
High consumption of red and processed meat can increase the risk of health problems including cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and even certain cancers.
Meat production also has a higher environmental impact – producing more planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions – than other types of agriculture and food production.
Not all meat is equal
This Oxford-based research team used data from the National Diet and Nutrition Survey – a detailed survey of the dietary habits of more than 15,000 people across the country.
This showed that daily meat consumption had reduced by about 17g per person per day.
What it did not reveal was the reason people were changing their diets. But market research in 2019 suggested that almost 40% of meat-eaters were actively trying to reduce their consumption, with many citing either health or environmental reasons.
Dr Stewart stresses that, for those who want to reduce the environmental impact of what they eat, “any reduction in meat will have an impact”.
“You don’t have to be vegetarian,” she said. “Although, in general, meat-free dishes will have a lower impact.
“But if you’re someone that eats meat every day, reducing your meat consumption by 30% just looks like having two meat-free days per week.”
There is huge variation in the environmental impact of meat; it depends on what livestock are fed and where and how the meat is produced.
This Oxford-based research team used data from the National Diet and Nutrition Survey – a detailed survey of the dietary habits of more than 15,000 people across the country.
This showed that daily meat consumption had reduced by about 17g per person per day.
What it did not reveal was the reason people were changing their diets. But market research in 2019 suggested that almost 40% of meat-eaters were actively trying to reduce their consumption, with many citing either health or environmental reasons.
Dr Stewart stresses that, for those who want to reduce the environmental impact of what they eat, “any reduction in meat will have an impact”.
“You don’t have to be vegetarian,” she said. “Although, in general, meat-free dishes will have a lower impact.
“But if you’re someone that eats meat every day, reducing your meat consumption by 30% just looks like having two meat-free days per week.”
There is huge variation in the environmental impact of meat; it depends on what livestock are fed and where and how the meat is produced.
The COP26 global climate summit in Glasgow in November is seen as crucial if climate change is to be brought under control. Almost 200 countries are being asked for their plans to cut emissions, and it could lead to major changes to our everyday lives.
- Why the COP26 climate summit is important
- What will climate change look like for you?
- Will the UK meet it’s climate targets?
- Simple guide to climate change
“Locally produced meat has a much lower impact than meat that has been imported,” Dr Stewart pointed out.
She and her colleagues have also been studying the effect of “environmental impact labelling” on consumer choices. They have designed experimental labels that score a product based on its greenhouse gas emissions, biodiversity loss, water-use and water pollution.
“When you don’t have the information about environmental impact of food, it’s really hard to shop with that in mind,” she pointed out.
Having the support of those we eat our meals with, the Oxford researchers say, makes it easier for us to change our diets. And the availability and prominence of meat-free food options has an effect on people’s food choices, too.
“So, for example, if you’re at a restaurant, you often see a vegetarian options ‘box of shame’ at the bottom of the menu rather than at the top with chef’s specials,” Dr Stewart explained.
The team’s ongoing study of what drives people to reduce their meat consumption has revealed some simple strategies that participants have found helpful, including:
- Trying one new vegetarian recipe;
- Making one meal in a day vegetarian, rather than going a whole day without meat;
- Reducing portion size: In a recipe that includes meat, like a bolognese, reduce the amount of meat and supplement that with lentils and vegetables.
“Hopefully this paper will help us understand the patterns and trends so we can tailor public health policies and behavioural nudges to help people choose more sustainable options,” said Dr Stewart.
WAV COP26 Links:
Search Results for “COp26” – World Animals Voice
Regards Mark
World Animals Voice 